SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Geez. The SRT-8 is the real deal.
One other thing, given the 400lb weight difference, it's plainly obvious the the 6.1 Hemi absolutely destroys the LS2.
Now what's gonna happen when the lighter Charger gets the motor?
high 12s stock? In the car rags.
mid-low 12s in good hands?
One other thing, given the 400lb weight difference, it's plainly obvious the the 6.1 Hemi absolutely destroys the LS2.
Now what's gonna happen when the lighter Charger gets the motor?
high 12s stock? In the car rags.
mid-low 12s in good hands?
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 578
From: N. Providence, RI
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Originally Posted by Z28x
The SRT-8 didn't, CTSv was faster in the 1/4mi/ & 0-60, plus pulled better skidpad #'s
Registered User
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 2,368
From: OR
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
ouch.... I bet that 5 speed tranny helped out alot (along with the engine) for the SRT-8
a little disappointing about the handling numbers of the GTO though.. don't they come with skinny M+S tires?
was the GTO an auto or stick?
a little disappointing about the handling numbers of the GTO though.. don't they come with skinny M+S tires?
was the GTO an auto or stick?
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,402
From: Toronto, ON Canada
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Originally Posted by Ken S
ouch.... I bet that 5 speed tranny helped out alot (along with the engine) for the SRT-8
a little disappointing about the handling numbers of the GTO though.. don't they come with skinny M+S tires?
was the GTO an auto or stick?
a little disappointing about the handling numbers of the GTO though.. don't they come with skinny M+S tires?
was the GTO an auto or stick?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Originally Posted by Z284ever
Someone feel free to jump in with more specifics.....but I believe that the 3 series has an extremely sophisticated multi-link IRS, far more advanced than the GTO's. It does however, share front MacPherson struts.
The MN12 T-bird sure had a great suspension though. It was a level of sophistication, head and shoulders, above anything that Ford....or any domestic had accomplished before in a passenger car. I seriously considered a new SC in '89, before I bought my IROC.....so I know what you mean.
But as you say Guy, they were heavy. I believe that lots of heads rolled at Ford, over it's weight.
The MN12 T-bird sure had a great suspension though. It was a level of sophistication, head and shoulders, above anything that Ford....or any domestic had accomplished before in a passenger car. I seriously considered a new SC in '89, before I bought my IROC.....so I know what you mean.
But as you say Guy, they were heavy. I believe that lots of heads rolled at Ford, over it's weight.
As for BMW's trailing arm suspension, it's the Z3 that has it. The 3 series got something called a "Z-link" in it's last changeover. It's patented by BMW, and can barely be called a trailing arm.
Wrong call on my side.
Last edited by guionM; Dec 30, 2004 at 12:26 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 2,368
From: OR
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
One thing I do remember reading about the Monaro's is the rear suspension's weakness of camber control thruout range of motion, which becomes alot more noticable when you put significatly wider tires on, obviously..
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Originally Posted by Ken S
One thing I do remember reading about the Monaro's is the rear suspension's weakness of camber control thruout range of motion, which becomes alot more noticable when you put significatly wider tires on, obviously..
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Has anyone read that whole GTO thread? It's extremely entertaining!
First, everyone believes the numbers are fiction.
Then everyone believes the the SRT-8 is a ringer.
No one can come to grips that the 6.1 is actually under rated.
The reason the SRT-8 costs so little is 'cause DCX figured no one would spend $49K for it. (My personal favorite )
The GTO could stop as well as the 300.....if.......it........only.......could...have ...the...300's brakes and rubber.........bolted on to it.
(maybe this is actually my favorite).
The Hemi 6.1 motor is ugly. (Unlike the LS1/LS2 beauty queen motor).
Not fair since no one who buys an SRT-8, will actually take it to the "strip".
Moderator deletes posts by Mopar fan for calling GTO's looks...'a warmed over Grand Am'.
Sensitive bunch....huh?
First, everyone believes the numbers are fiction.
Then everyone believes the the SRT-8 is a ringer.
No one can come to grips that the 6.1 is actually under rated.
The reason the SRT-8 costs so little is 'cause DCX figured no one would spend $49K for it. (My personal favorite
)The GTO could stop as well as the 300.....if.......it........only.......could...have ...the...300's brakes and rubber.........bolted on to it.
(maybe this is actually my favorite).The Hemi 6.1 motor is ugly. (Unlike the LS1/LS2 beauty queen motor).
Not fair since no one who buys an SRT-8, will actually take it to the "strip".
Moderator deletes posts by Mopar fan for calling GTO's looks...'a warmed over Grand Am'.
Sensitive bunch....huh?
Last edited by Z284ever; Dec 31, 2004 at 01:39 AM.
Registered User
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 248
Re: SRT-8 vs CTSv vs GTO
Originally Posted by Z284ever
Who's to say that they're not all ringers? 
I am totally shock at you..... You do not happen to recall the many Magnum owners
about the performance of their cars? I know a little bit about overrating...04 Cobra's..... 02 SS's.......The Magnums that were used for the mag. tests.... 
But I do agree with you though, And your point is extremely valid.
